Under active development Content is continuously updated and improved

KSI-SVC-VRIValidating Resource Integrity

LOW
MODERATE

Formerly KSI-SVC-05

>Control Description

Use cryptographic methods to validate the integrity of machine-based information resources.
Defined terms:
Information Resource
Machine-Based (information resources)
Persistent Validation

>NIST 800-53 Controls

>Trust Center Components
4

Ways to express your implementation of this indicator — approaches vary by organization size, complexity, and data sensitivity.

From the field: Mature implementations express software integrity through SLSA framework compliance — build provenance tracked and verified at each pipeline stage, code signing enforced via policy engines, and SBOM generated automatically from build manifests. Supply chain integrity becomes a measurable, verifiable property with signed attestations.

Software Integrity Verification

Product Security Features

Code signing, artifact verification, and supply chain integrity controls — enforced at each pipeline stage

Automated: CI/CD pipeline verifies code signatures and artifact provenance at each stage

Build Pipeline Security

Architecture & Diagrams

Architecture expressing secure build pipeline with integrity checks at each stage — SLSA framework compliance

Integrity Policy Enforcement

Product Security Features

Automated enforcement of integrity requirements — unsigned artifacts blocked from deployment, provenance verified before promotion

Automated: Policy engines verify signatures and provenance before artifact deployment

SBOM and Dependency Management

Evidence Artifacts

Machine-readable SBOM with dependency vulnerability tracking — generated from build pipelines

>Programmatic Queries

Beta
CI/CD

CLI Commands

Export SBOM for a repository
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/dependency-graph/sbom --jq '.sbom.packages[] | {name: .name, version: .versionInfo}' | head -30
Check Dependabot vulnerability alerts
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/dependabot/alerts --jq '.[].{package: .security_advisory.summary, severity: .security_advisory.severity, state: .state}' | head -20

>20x Assessment Focus Areas

Aligned with FedRAMP 20x Phase Two assessment methodology

Completeness & Coverage:

  • Does cryptographic integrity validation cover all machine-based resource types — container images, VM images, application binaries, IaC templates, configuration files, and firmware?
  • Are there resource types where integrity validation is not performed, and how are those exceptions documented and justified?
  • How do you ensure integrity baselines are established for all resources at a known-good state, and updated only through approved change processes?
  • Does integrity validation extend to resources in all environments (production, staging, DR) and all deployment stages (build, deploy, runtime)?

Automation & Validation:

  • What automated mechanisms validate resource integrity — image signing verification, file integrity monitoring (FIM), signed artifacts in CI/CD pipelines?
  • What happens when integrity validation detects a resource that does not match its cryptographic baseline — is it quarantined, blocked from execution, or only alerted?
  • How do you detect if an attacker modifies a resource and updates the hash to match — do you use signed baselines with protected signing keys?
  • How frequently is runtime integrity validation performed, and what is the maximum time between a resource being tampered with and detection?

Inventory & Integration:

  • What tools perform integrity validation (Sigstore/cosign for containers, AIDE/OSSEC for file integrity, code signing for binaries)?
  • How do integrity baselines integrate with your CI/CD pipeline to ensure only signed, validated artifacts are deployed?
  • What PKI or signing infrastructure supports resource integrity validation, and how are signing keys protected?
  • How does integrity validation integrate with your SIEM to alert on and investigate integrity failures?

Continuous Evidence & Schedules:

  • How do you demonstrate that integrity validation has been active and effective across all resources over the past 90 days?
  • Is integrity validation data (baseline status, validation results, failure counts) available via API or dashboard?
  • How do you detect when integrity validation coverage drops — for example, when new resources are deployed without signed baselines?
  • What evidence shows integrity validation failures in the past year were investigated, root-caused, and remediated?

Update History

2026-02-04Removed italics and changed the ID as part of new standardization in v0.9.0-beta; no material changes.

Ask AI

Configure your API key to use AI features.